( 1)
/KOOC-0/93/KOOC-0/08 September/KOOC-0/8, the Japanese Kwantung Army created the "September 18th Incident" in the northeast of China, which shocked China and foreign countries, and it continued to expand the situation. Britain is fully aware that the incident was committed by Japan's "Manchuria military headquarters or commander (commander of the Kwantung Army)". It seems obvious that the Japanese "carefully engaged in conspiracy and hidden plans." (2) Cecil, the British representative to the League of Nations, pointed out in a memorandum: "There is no doubt that protected areas are the established policy of the Tokyo Military Department." (3) However, because Britain's interests in China are mainly distributed in the south of the Great Wall, especially in the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River, and its interests in the Northeast are negligible, Japanese aggression did not pose a threat or pressure to Britain's interests in China. Therefore, the British government with obvious pro-Japanese tendency believes that "Britain's interests in Manchuria are obviously less than the benefits of maintaining frank relations with Japan." (4) Moreover, at that time, Britain's military strength in the Far East was not enough to confront Japan, and the European and American powers were indifferent to Japan's actions. "No one thought of tying a bell around a cat's neck." [(5)] Therefore, Britain adopted a negative "non-interventionism" policy towards this incident, [(6)] to avoid being involved in disputes, especially to prevent Japan from being dissatisfied with Britain. The British Foreign Office instructed diplomatic envoys abroad "especially not to protest against either side first." (7) The specific method is that Britain uses its manipulated League of Nations to perfunctory China's appeal and international public opinion. Britain's move is appeasement to Japan, which has played an objective role in conniving at Japan.
10/0 On 26th and 28th October, Japan proposed five conditions for direct negotiations with China, and threatened not to withdraw its troops without negotiation. China, on the other hand, proposed withdrawing troops before negotiations. As we all know, the Sino-Japanese negotiations on the Japanese clause "will be between China and the tiger crawling on its back", but Britain is trying to facilitate the negotiations. (8) The League of Nations subsequently passed a resolution advocating direct negotiations between China and Japan. Britain estimated that the League of Nations would not do anything in the negotiations, and it could only end with "expressing regret". In order to cope with international public opinion, Britain manipulated the League of Nations when Japan proposed to ask it to send a fact-finding mission to the Northeast. 12, 10 At the meeting of the Executive Yuan of the League of Nations, a resolution was passed to send a fact-finding mission to northeast China. Japan's original intention is to prevent the League of Nations from adopting a resolution to sanction it, and to delay the time to create a fait accompli of occupying the Northeast. On the other hand, Britain took the initiative to cover up its diplomatic failure and passivity. The UK expects that the investigation will take 6-9 months. By then, the mood of both sides will calm down and the storm will subside on its own. This is the origin of Lipton investigation team. Britain once again appeased Japan.
The success in the northeast of China made Japanese ambition expand rapidly. In order to divert the attention of the international community from its occupation of Northeast China and gain a new base for attacking Chinese mainland, the Nanjing government of the Kuomintang was forced to yield. 19321On October 28th, Japan provoked the "January 28th Incident" with the so-called "Japanese monk incident". Japan's invasion of Shanghai, which is not within its sphere of influence, "will change the whole situation in the Yangtze River valley", which first directly threatened Britain's interests in China and shocked Britain. The British government has clearly realized that Japan's "adventure policy far exceeds our estimate so far." [(9)] 65438+1On October 29th, British Foreign Secretary Simon wrote to Prime Minister McDonald: "I have no doubt that Japan is carrying out an ambitious plan, just like they are in Manchuria." [( 10)] Pratt, adviser on Far East issues of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, predicted: "If Japan continues unchecked, Britain will be forced to completely withdraw from the Far East." 〔( 1 1)〕
According to its strength, Britain's sole purpose in China is to contain Japanese aggression and expansion in East China as much as possible through diplomatic channels and prevent Britain's interests in China from being damaged. Therefore, Britain adopted a "positive reconciliation policy" [( 12)], adopted a tougher policy and a series of proactive measures than before, and lampson, an "excellent expert on Japanese affairs" [( 13)], mediated between China and China, which finally led to the signing of the Armistice Agreement. Britain's active intervention was one of the important factors to quell the "1.28" incident. Therefore, Britain regards it as a great diplomatic victory.
(2)
After the signing of the Songhu armistice agreement, the situation in Shanghai gradually stabilized. /kloc-in July of 0/7, the Japanese troops stationed in Shanghai "withdrew according to the armistice agreement", and the tension in the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River finally eased. In this more than half a year, the Japanese army used the Shanghai Incident to divert the attention of international public opinion and gain time, and basically completed its invasion and expansion of northeast China. Therefore, how to deal with the Japanese occupation of northeast China has once again become the central issue of British Far East policy, which is related to the stability of the situation in China and even the Far East. What Japan did in the "December 28th Incident" had a strong shock to Britain. "In the Far East, we suffered heavy losses because of malice from Japan rather than other countries." [( 15)] "(Japan) is the real danger for Britain in the Far East. [( 16)] Japan has become a force threatening Britain's interests in China, endangering Britain's vested interests in the Far East and the Washington system of maintaining peace in the Asia-Pacific region. This forced Britain to take a cautious and serious attitude towards the development of the situation, actively seek the stability of the situation in Northeast China and prevent the Japanese army from entering Chinese mainland again.
On the issue of Japan's occupation of northeast China, Britain still stands on the position of colonialism, and regards northeast China as Japan's sphere of influence and "lifeline", emphasizing the "complexity" of the northeast issue. Willisley, the undersecretary of Far East Affairs of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, wrote: "It is difficult to judge the current development of Japan's treaty power in Manchuria on the basis of law." [( 17)] Because in their view, Japan's aggression and expansion in northeast China violated and trampled on international conventions, but economically and materially, Japan is "beneficial" to the development of this region. Moreover, considering its own interests, Britain believed that Japan actually controlled the Northeast and fostered the puppet regime. Therefore, it is impossible for Northeast China to return to the state before the September 18th Incident, and Japan "will surely win in Manchuria, just like in North Korea". [( 18)] Britain also thinks: "As long as it can be avoided, Japan does not intend to break with the West." [( 19)] However, Britain also clearly sees that Japanese aggression has aroused widespread anger all over the world. In the League of Nations, many small and medium-sized countries criticized Japan and demanded that the League of Nations sanction Japan. "The democratic forces of all countries unanimously voiced their opposition to Japan and solidarity with China; In China, anti-Japanese patriotic movements break out one after another. Lampson telegraphed Simon: "If we forgive injustice or shelter Japan in any way, its influence will be very sad and worldwide." [(20)] This kind of influence "may lead to Britain's passive position in a dilemma in the League of Nations", which weakened Britain's control over the League of Nations and led to an anti-British movement in China. Britain still remembers the anti-British movement in China from 65438 to 0927, especially the measures against British goods. In addition, Britain does not want to see the Northeast absorbed by Japan, because it violates the "open door" principle supported by Britain and will close the door of the Northeast to Britain. Therefore, "for the main interests of life and death, we must continue to mediate. "(2 1)" At this time, "mediation" is different from before. That is to face the reality inside and outside the Great Wall and the security of British interests in China, and take cautious and effective diplomatic measures to maintain the status quo. Pratt said authoritatively: "Based on the pure judicial principle, it is impossible to find a permanent solution to the problem. We must put aside theoretical sovereignty and face reality. " 〔(22)〕
In view of the present situation in the Far East, the principle of Britain's corresponding policy is to "neither anger Japan nor give up its friendship with China" and give play to "the balanced force of maintaining peace". [(23)] Because "Japan really has enough power to openly resist the world, no country will prepare for war for restriction." [(24)] Therefore, the British government believes that, on the one hand, "we must avoid being in a position of confrontation with Japan and remain in the middle of the road." [(25)] On the other hand, although the Kuomintang government and its troops in China are unwilling and unable to resist Japan, and the * * * production party and its armed forces are besieged in Hunan, Jiangxi, Fujian and other places, they are unable to go to the anti-Japanese front. However, in the Far East, China is still a powerful force to attack, resist and contain Japan, with considerable potential. China's boycott of Japanese goods, in addition to the patriotic anti-Japanese movement that is being carried out nationwide and widely supported by the world, has also dealt a very heavy blow to Japan in economy and trade. Furthermore, the China government and society all hope that Britain and other powers will intervene and stop Japanese aggression and expansion to varying degrees. Therefore, if Britain stands idly by or is too partial to Japan, China will be angry with Britain because of disappointment. British Foreign Office officials realized that only by promoting relations with China can Britain maintain its influence in the Far East. 〔(26)〕
In this case, the principle of balance became the keynote of British Far East policy at this time. [(27)] In the process of implementation, Britain still did not come forward directly, but manipulated the League of Nations to act on its behalf behind the scenes. Simon's course of action towards Britain is summarized as follows: "(1) Believe in the League of Nations and act in concert with it if possible; (2) Don't take the lead if it will lead to serious confrontation with Japan but it is unnecessary; (3) treat China and Japan fairly; (4) Strive to keep Japan in the League of Nations. " [(28)] 12 13 Pratt wrote in the Memorandum on the Principles Britain pursues in the League of Nations that "British representatives should avoid being in a prominent or dominant position" and emphasized that "the principle of the British government ... is to maintain traditional friendship with them and try their best to restore harmonious international relations in the Far East in disputes between the two sides. 〔(29)〕
(3)
When Britain carried out its policy, the first problem it encountered was how to treat the puppet Manchukuo. Japan has repeatedly threatened that "the solution to the Manchu problem lies in recognizing Manchukuo as an autonomous country" [29] and threatened to withdraw from the League of Nations. In this regard, Britain is fully aware that if it recognizes the puppet Manchukuo. It is tantamount to openly supporting Japan's aggression and expansion. Internationally, this will be regarded as trampling on international treaties such as the "Nine Nations Convention" and damaging Britain's reputation and image; In China, it will definitely arouse strong opposition from the government and people of China and harm the interests of Britain in China. For the puppet Manchukuo, Britain is clear: "Puyi, as a puppet, has absolutely no power ... Japan's top priority is to consolidate its position in Manchuria, and the overall plan is to turn it into a country like North Korea." [(3 1)] If Britain meets Japan's demands, it will undoubtedly admit that the northeast of China is a Japanese colony. As a result, Britain and other powers will not be able to implement the "open door" policy in the northeast of China, so that they will not be able to expand their influence in the northeast of China in the future. Therefore, Britain's countermeasure is to oppose the "independence" of Northeast China and demand the abolition of the puppet Manchukuo on the grounds of the provisions of the "Nine Nations Convention" to safeguard China's territorial integrity; On the premise of confirming China's sovereignty over the Northeast, it is suggested that the Northeast should be allowed to be autonomous and the Japanese special position in the Northeast should be recognized.
Britain wants to take advantage of the fact that Japan has not officially "recognized" the puppet Manchukuo in diplomacy, trying to dissuade Japan from "recognizing" the puppet Manchukuo, although Britain understands that "the Japanese government's recognition of Manchukuo cannot be delayed for a long time". [(32)] On September 15, Japan rejected the British request and "recognized" the puppet Manchukuo diplomatically. The first attempt in Britain failed.
Lipton fact-finding mission is an important tool for Britain to implement its policy. The activities of the investigation team are completely under the control of Britain. On March 14, Lipton investigation team arrived in Shanghai from Japan. On June 5438+05, Williamsley instructed lampson to convey British policies and ideas to Litton. [(33)] In order to prevent Litton from being influenced by the anti-Japanese sentiment of the League of Nations, on September 2 1, Simon called to advise Litton not to stay in Geneva on his way back to England. 〔(34)〕
On October 3rd, 65438/KLOC-0, the Litton Investigation Report issued by the League of Nations (hereinafter referred to as the Report) [(35)] runs through the "balance principle" of "facing reality" in Britain. In addition to the preface and introduction, the report consists of 65,438+00 chapters and 65,438+08,000 words. The experts of the Committee made 9 special research reports. In order to maintain China's territorial integrity and adhere to the "open door" principle, it has acknowledged some facts. The report pointed out: China's territorial sovereignty over the three northeastern provinces is recognized. "The three northeastern provinces are part of China, which is a fact recognized by China and other countries." It also accused the Japanese army of occupying the Northeast without declaring war and "making it leave China and declare independence. The facts are there." On the issue of Sino-Japanese dispute, although he defended Japan, he thought that the nature of the Sino-Japanese struggle was "economic", "As for the method of cutting off economic ties (that is, boycotting Japanese goods), the investigation team declared that illegal acts were inevitable" and "both sides went their own way" and so on. However, he believes that the "September 18th Incident" was instigated by Japan, that "the Japanese department has an accurate preparation plan" and that "193 1 year" was "insufficient to justify military actions". Regarding Japan's "self-defense", "the investigation team ... refused", saying that "this is Japan's later military action and cannot be regarded as a legitimate way of self-defense." As for the puppet Manchukuo, the report believes that it was a puppet regime fostered by Japan, because "it cannot be considered that the current regime was produced by a real and natural independence movement." "... the composition of Manchukuo ... the two most powerful factors are the existence of Japanese troops and the activities of Japanese civilian and military officials ... Without these two factors, the' new country' could never be established. "As for the puppet Manchukuo," most China people have different tendencies ",thinking that it is only a tool of the Japanese.
On the content of the principles and measures to resolve the Sino-Japanese dispute, the views of the report completely inherited those of Britain. It believes that in the northeast of China, we should face up to the reality, "... if we just restore the old state, it is not the solution. ..... restitution, but also make the dispute reappear, just for the whole theoretical method of the case, without considering the truth of the situation "; Advocating the abolition of the puppet Manchukuo, "it is equally inappropriate to maintain and recognize the current regime of Manchukuo ... This solution is not in line with the main principles of international obligations, is detrimental to the goodwill of the two countries as the basis of peace in the Far East, and also violates the interests of China, regardless of the wishes of the Manchu people ... It is also doubtful whether it can safeguard the permanent interests of Japan in the future"; We demand to safeguard the Japanese "special interests" in the northeast of China. "We recognize the importance of Manchuria in Japan's economic development. Japan is a necessary requirement for the country's economic development. We believe that there is nothing wrong with building a consolidated government that can maintain order. " "Japan's rights and interests in Manchuria cannot be ignored. If a solution does not recognize this, or ignores the historical relationship between Japan and the localities, it cannot be considered an appropriate solution "; It is suggested that the northeast should be autonomous. "The reorganization of the Manchu government should be within the scope of China's sovereignty and territorial integrity, so that it can enjoy autonomy to suit the local conditions and characteristics of the three provinces." In order to prevent Japan from "enjoying economic and even political management power" and dominating the Northeast, the report further proposes that this kind of autonomy should be carried out in the form of international supervision, "promoting the construction of China through international cooperation", and "the chief executive of the autonomous government may appoint two foreigners of different nationalities to supervise (1) the police and (2) the tax authorities on the list submitted by the Executive Yuan of the League of Nations. Two members ... should have extensive permissions. " "The Chief Executive should appoint a foreigner from the list proposed by the Board of Directors of the Bank for International Settlements as the general adviser of the central banks of the three northeastern provinces." "The chief executive of the autonomous government may appoint a considerable number of foreign consultants, among which Japanese should account for an important proportion." "... with the assistance of foreign coaches, a special gendarmerie should be organized as the only armed force in the three northeastern provinces. "
According to this report, Britain conducted mediation activities in the League of Nations. The government of China said it accepted the report, while the Japanese objected. In particular, the imperial government (referring to the Japanese government) categorically cannot accept the denial of the actual situation in Manchuria in the report. [(36)] A Japanese government spokesman claimed: "The report is unfair to Japan, but not to China." 165438+1October 2 1 Japan's League of Nations Executive Yuan debated the Northeast issue. In his speech, Youko Matsuoka, the representative of Japan, tried his best to defend Japan, blocked the adoption of the report at the meeting, and described Japan's aggression as "peace in the Far East and world peace" [37], demanding that the report be revised according to Japan's point of view. Gu Weijun, the representative of China, argued and condemned this. Meetings are always characterized by debates between representatives of China and Japan. Simon, who attended the meeting, was partial to Japan, confusing the aggressor with the victim, emphasizing the part of the report that accused China, claiming that both China and Japan were at fault and that China should be responsible for the crisis, and expressing Britain's opposition to sanctions against Japan. "Journalists all over the world generally believe that Britain and the United States succumbed to Japan in the Manchuria incident." [(38)] 65438+On February 6th, the League of Nations held a general meeting. The debate at the meeting was fierce and adjourned on the 9 th. Japan has been threatening to withdraw from the League of Nations. Obviously, "Japan has no intention of using the peaceful institutions of the League of Nations to solve their difficulties ... they will not tolerate outside interference in Manchuria." 〔(39)〕
In order to dispel the idea of Japan's withdrawal from the League of Nations, Britain manipulated the League of Nations to formulate a compromise plan, avoiding Japan's request to cancel the recognition of the puppet Manchukuo and the League of Nations passed a resolution not to recognize the puppet Manchukuo, and formally agreed to the report. The existence of the puppet Manchukuo was only vaguely opposed. Britain submitted this plan to a 19 Committee of the League of Nations, hoping to ease the confrontation within the League of Nations. On the other hand, Britain intends to adopt the method of procrastination, "let things last until (1933) 1 ends," [(40)] and imagine a turning point in the game. Until 1933 1.4, Britain was still offering some concessions to Japan in exchange for them. On June 5438+10/2, Pratt wrote in a memorandum of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs: "We must wait for the opportunity. By that time, it will be possible to solve the problems between China and Japan, which is currently impossible. " [(4 1)] However, contrary to expectations, within the League of Nations, the compromise plan was aborted due to the opposition of China and small and medium-sized countries. In addition, in June 5438 +654381October+May, President-elect franklin roosevelt of the United States announced that he would not recognize the puppet Manchukuo. The new tough attitude of the United States towards Japan has a great influence on European powers such as Britain and France. At the same time, fascism and militarism became more rampant in Japan, and the Japanese government implemented a new plan of aggression and expansion against China. 654381October 3, the Japanese army occupied Shanhaiguan and launched an attack on the Jehol area. The Japanese artillery fire declared the failure of British policy and shattered Britain's attempt to "drive the Japanese back to the barracks" through diplomatic channels and public pressure to solve the Northeast issue. "Facing the reality," the British government said helplessly, "it is better to let Japan leave than to damage the dignity and principles of the League of Nations." [(42)] Simon laughed at himself: "What we are prepared to see is Japan's withdrawal, not the League of Nations giving up its own principles." [(43)] On February 24th, the League of Nations General Assembly passed a resolution: Northeast sovereignty belongs to China; Safeguard the territorial integrity of China; Member States of the League of Nations do not recognize the puppet Manchukuo; Ask the Japanese to retreat to Manchuria. Finally, Youko Matsuoka made a brief statement with a straight face. He said: "The Japanese government has to think that Japan's efforts to cooperate with the League of Nations on the Sino-Japanese dispute have come to an end." [(44)] The representative of Japan immediately withdrew. On March 27th, the Japanese government "thought that there was no room for further cooperation with the alliance." Announce one's withdrawal from the League of Nations. The mediation efforts of Britain and other countries to the Far East crisis ended in failure. At the same time, Japan strengthened and expanded its aggression against the Jehol region. On May 3 1 day, the Japanese army forced the Nanjing government to sign the Tanggu Agreement, thus completing the occupation of northeast China and Jehol.
(4)
Obviously, because Britain has rich economic interests in China and the Far East, it can't let Japan do whatever it wants after the "December 28th Incident". However, due to the lack of strength to compete with Japan, Britain can only rely on a series of international treaties and turn to diplomatic means and public opinion tools to deal with Japan under the slogan of safeguarding China's sovereignty and territorial integrity. The primary task is to prevent and limit its further expansion of aggression. Therefore, Britain tried to contain Japan in the northeast at the expense of the northeast of China, so as to relieve Japan's pressure on the south of the Yangtze River. However, this weak British policy is doomed to failure when power trumps justice. Therefore, the result of the Far East crisis "is obviously a military and political victory for Japan." 〔(45)〕
During this period, the British policy was still the same as the previous period, focusing on the security of its own interests, and the report was the embodiment of its main content. China historians have always held a negative attitude towards Britain's Far East policy at this time, especially the report "reflects the collusion and struggle between Western imperialism and Japan in China". [(46)] In this regard, I think the British policy should be criticized and blamed. As an imperialist country, Britain does not respect China's sovereignty, but is indifferent to Japanese crimes. When Japan threatened western interference and public condemnation by withdrawing from the League of Nations, Britain was worried that Japan "remained a first-class country and decisive factor in the Far East". If Japan withdraws from the League of Nations, the League of Nations will be damaged in the public mind. "[(47)] In the report, the rights and status of China have been neglected in many places. However, we should not ignore the reality at that time, that is, the Japanese occupation of northeast China was completed; Nanjing government's anti-Japanese will is depressed, and China's army has withdrawn into Shanhaiguan; In the northeast, large-scale effective military resistance basically stopped. Therefore, in the face of Japan's aggressive arrogance, China's top priority is to safeguard China's territorial integrity and China's sovereignty over Northeast China and prevent further Japanese aggression. Therefore, objectively speaking, British policies and reports have quite positive contents for China. It is these contents that deny the legitimacy of Japanese aggression in law and put Japan in a passive position in front of world public opinion. To this end, Japan was furious, claiming that Japan's policy was "completely different from that of the League of Nations" and broke away from the League of Nations.
Britain's policy failure in the Far East crisis undoubtedly showed Japan that the powers could not effectively stop Japan's expansion. After the crisis, the Japanese stepped up its aggression and infiltration into China, and the peace situation created by the Versailles-Washington system in the Asia-Pacific region tended to collapse. At the same time, the role of the League of Nations in international affairs is getting smaller and smaller, and it gradually exists in name only. In addition, Japan's ever-expanding ambition and unscrupulous behavior make Britain's situation in China and the Far East more and more passive and difficult. Cecil wrote in 194 1: Britain's arbitrary actions during the Far East crisis "... inspired the invading troops in Europe-first Italy, then Germany-to despise the anti-aggression barrier painstakingly built by Geneva (League of Nations) and brought us to the present situation step by step. ”〔(48)〕
_____________________________________________________________
note:
(1) Bailey's Britain and World Affairs in the Twentieth Century (M.H. Bailey's Britain and World Affairs in the Twentieth Century). ) London, 197 1, p. 54.
(2) Lohan Butler's Collection of British Diplomatic Documents 19 19- 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the Collection) (Lohan Butler, British Foreign Policy Papers,191939).
(3)(7)(8) Collection of Documents Volume 2, Volume 8, No.739, No.538 and No.694.
(4) Collection of Documents Volume 2, Volume 9, No.21.
(5) Thorne's The Limitations of Foreign Policy: The Crisis of the West, the League of Nations and the Far East 193 1 933 (C. Thorne's The Limitations of Foreign Policy: The Crisis of the West, the League of Nations and the Far East1931).
(6) My essay On Britain's Policy towards Japan during the Far East Crisis1931-kloc-0/933, Journal of Nanjing University, 199 1 year supplement.
(9)( 10) Thorne, previously published, p. 238.
(1 1)( 13) Document Collection Volume II Volume IX No.238 No.423.
(12) My essay Britain and the November 28th Incident, Jiangsu Social Sciences, No.6, 1993.
(14) (15) (16) document set, Volume 2, Volume 10, No.536, No.678, No.536.
(17) Roger Lewis 19 19- 1939 British Far East Strategy (Roger Lewis, British Far East Strategy,1919-/kloc
(18) Thorne, above, page 293.
(19) Literature Collection, Volume 2, Volume 10,No. 169 (5).
(20) Collection of Documents Volume 2,No. 1 1 Volume, No.293.
(2 1)(24) Notes 545 (1 1), Appendix 449, Volume II, Literature Collection.
(22) Roger Louis, Book I, p. 200.
(23)(25) Thorne, ibid., pp. 296-357.
(26) Tate's Britain and East Asia (A. tratt, Britain and East Asia, 1933- 1937), Cambridge, 1973, p. 38.
(27) My essay "Evaluation on Several Evaluations of British Policy towards Japan during the Far East Crisis", No.6 of Historical Monthly, 1993.
(28) Collection of Documents Volume 2, Volume 10, Note 674②.
(29) Collection of Documents Volume 2, Volume 1 1, Volume 85.
(30)(3 1)(32) Compilation of documents, Volume 2, Volume 10, No.419, No.513, No.462.
(33) No.356, Volume II, Volume IX, Document Collection (16).
(34) Collection of Documents Volume 2, Volume 10, No.700.
(35) Its full name is the Report of the Japan-China Dispute Committee of the League of Nations. The contents of Litton's investigation report in this paper are all taken from Selected Documents of Imperial Aggression against China since World War I by Gong Gujin (Sanlian, 1958), p. 138- 166.
(36) The September 18th Incident in Chinese Archives, Zhonghua Book Company, 1988, p. 695.
(37) Thorne, op cit., p 336.
(38) Ian Nais' 19 19- 1952' (Ian Nish, Angel-Japanese Alienation,19-1952).
(39) Collection of Documents Volume 2, Volume 10, p. 528.
(40) Thorne, above, p. 360.
(4 1) Collection of Documents Volume 2, Volume 1 1, p. 202.
Thorne, op cit. , page 362.
(43) Corelli barnett's corelli barnett, The Collapse of British Power, London, 1972, pp. 363-362.
(44) "Memoirs of Gu Weijun" Volume 2, Zhonghua Book Company, p. 182.
(45) Collection of Documents Volume 2, Volume 1 1, note 559⑤.
(46) Hong's History of International Relations 193 1939, 1980, p. 22.
(47) Literature Collection, Volume 2, Volume 1 1, p. 202.
Thorne, op cit. , page 8.